Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

carlweezer

**do You Prefer 2 Scoring Lines Or 3 Scoring Lines?**

63 posts in this topic

What is the winning formula?? Before the hodgson trade we were a 3 line scoring team. After the the trade deadline we acquired Pahlsson, traded Hodgson and ultimately became a 2 scoring line 1 checkkng line and 1 grinder line team.

My question is will this formula work? I think under Av we have no choice as he likes having a checking 3rd line.

Personally id rather have a scorinng 3 rd line, someone like Schroeder to centre it then have manny lappy playing 4th line.

I was thrilled to hear Gillis say he thinks offence still wins in the nhl despite all the low scoring teams having success at this years playoffs.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WOW thank GOD something other than a Love/Hate Luongo thread!!!

To answer your question, I think either option would have worked better for us this year instead of our 1 scoring line team that just got its ass kicked.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I prefer 4 scoring and defensively sound lines with 3 strong D parings and an impermeable goalie.

Yep, that sounds like my type of team.

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i used to prefer 3 scoring line but the NHL has gone back to grinding it out after the bruins won the cup.

Now in days i think Gillis has learned that you need 2 and 2

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Three scoring lines:

First line

Second line

Fourth line

Third line should be used for grinding out games and wearing down the opponents' top lines.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like when we can roll 4 healthy lines, usually that means 2 scoring lines and 2 lines you have to keep an eye on when they hit the ice. To many you will be disapointed to hear that means Manny and Raymond are players that make this work.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, when our 3-1 setup effectively became a 1-1-1-1 with Kesler's line reverting to more defensive minutes, I think you either have to have 3 really defensively capable scoring lines, or go back to the more traditional setup and hope your bottom six can contribute offensively as well.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 scoring lines. Teams wear down when you keep coming at them in waves. I hate to sound repetitive, but the Canucks were far more dangerous when they were able to deploy Raymond-Hodgson-Hansen after the Sedin line and the Kesler line. It's the centre depth that's key. Vancouver had a good thing going with Sedin, Kesler and Hodgson. That was going to be the crux of the team for a long time.

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 lines for sure. that's how the last few SC winners did it so i'm down with that

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WOW thank GOD something other than a Love/Hate Luongo thread!!!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

either way you're suggesting a 2nd line that can score...we didn't have that in the playoffs

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AV prefers a more traditional 2 - 2 line set-up. The only reason the Canucks didn't pursue that set-up into the 10 - 11 playoffs or so much this past season was due to Malhotra's injury and subsequent difficulties in re-gaining his pre-injury form from 10 - 11 regular season.

I am also in favour of this system, but that being said, you also have to go with what you have at the time in the way of available players.

Since the Canucks didn't have a fully capable Malhotra for most of the season, it made sense for the Canucks to go with a 3 - 1 system with Hodgson acting as the 3C. This altered the strength of the line making it more offensively focused, but greatly diminshed its' defensive role. With the acquisition of Pahlsson at the trade deadline, the team was able to return to a normal form.

And it's not like the third line will be bereft of scoring. I like Hansen and Higgins as 3rd line wingers. They are aggressive checkers and they are also capable scorers. Malhotra's strengths are more defensively orientated, but this being said he is also able to put some points on the board. During the 10 - 11 season he scored 11g 19a for 30 pts in 72 games with what was a weaker offensive group than what he will have to work with this upcoming season (Hansen and Torres each scored 29 pts in more games played). With Higgins and Hansen on the wings, that line might put up around 50 goals and 120 pts total.

Ideally, the Canucks would clone Kesler, Holmstrom and Bob Gainey and use them as the third line. They would check the other team into the ice and still score a bundle of goals.

regards,

G.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about 1 scoring line before we talk about a 2nd or 3rd scoring line. :)

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 lines. The 3rd line is key because they have to check and chip in offensively. We saw it the past 2 years how Boston and Chicago had good 3rd lines as well as TIMELY goals from their 4th line.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.